Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUBODH SHARMA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Subodh Sharma v. State Of U.P. And Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 10881 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 4847 (25 October 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble R.C.Deepak, J.

  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was granted the licence no. 1296/2000  for a DBBL gun. A case under Section 302 IPC was registered against him and the trial proceeded as S.T. No. 510 of 2003 but he was acquitted by the trial court on 28.2.2004. It is alleged that the said gun was used for the offence, therefore, a notice was served upon the petitioner for cancelling the licence. He put in his appearance and filed an objection but remained absent and an exparte order dated 13,.2.2004 was passed cancelling the said licence. He presented an application for recalling of the order but that was   refused. An appeal was preferred and the appellate court also dismissed the appeal on 5.5.2005. The further contention of the learned counsel is that the learned appellate court has given some unreasonable findings with regard to the acquittal of the case, which in no way can be said to be a judicial order. Since a criminal court has acquitted the petitioner in the alleged offence, the learned Commissioner cannot make any comment on the said verdict of the trial court. His contention is that the petitioner be provided an opportunity of hearing and adduce the evidence in support of his claim.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders dated 26.4.2005 and 5.5.2005 passed by the courts below are hereby set aside. The District Magistrate is hereby directed to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and dispose of his objection on the basis of the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances within a period of one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of the order.

With these observations, the petition is disposed of.

Dt/- 25.10.2005  

PKG/5 (10881/05)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.